By Request Of Eyezen

[APG]

Eyezen asked me to get a clip of this play for discussion:

[JugglingReferee]

To establish legal guarding position, the defender should have been facing the ball carrier *and* have two feet down.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

To establish legal guarding position, the defender should have been facing the ball carrier *and* have two feet down.

And did he not?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

And did he not?

My point exactly. It was so obvious, I can't imagine why this is a block.

[rockyroad]

The new L got beat down the court and did not have a good look at the defender's position. Looks to me like it should have been a PC call. Mistakes happen.

[SCalScoreKeeper]

How was this ruled a block?
LGP is established and maintained with the sidestep and his feet are not within the RA.Looks like a PC foul to me too but rockyroad is right-the new lead does not do a good job of sprinting down the court and keeping up with the play.He trails it all the way and only gets into position after the hit forcing him to guess.

[APG]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

My point exactly. It was so obvious, I can't imagine why this is a block.

If you look at the first part of the clip, the portion that is in real time, you'll see the lead motion to the head coach that he had the defender sliding.

Now I personally have a charge as well on the play. I actually think the lead had a pretty good look at the play as at the time of contact he has no bodies between him and he has a decent look between the ball handler and defender.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I actually think the lead had a pretty good look at the play as at the time of contact he has no bodies between him and he has a decent look between the ball handler and defender.

Then why would he call it a block?

I think that he never looked at the defender - he got beat, was running, and turned his head and watched the ball handler the entire way. He never looked to see where the defender was...jmo.

[ballgame99]

thanks guys, this is part of the reason I frequent this board.

[Wellmer]

Ditto for me. I have been questioning some b/c calls when I watch college games on TV. What I am taking from this is, as long as the offensive player has not yet become airborne, it's up to him to avoid any contact if the defensive player has gained LGP. The ones that I have seen that I questioned were the ones where the defender has gained LGP and then when he sees the offensive player may be able to avoid him, he leans in that direction causing the contact, and subsequently still gets the charge call. He may not move his feet, but his upper body absorbs the contact since he leaned that way. The offensive player does his best to avoid the defender but if he is not yet airborne, I am hearing it's still a player control foul. Am I correct on that? This discussion is great by the way.

[ballgame99]

How is the OP video any different than this one?:

Verticality Duke v. Ohio State - YouTube

Does this Duke player not have LGP as we have define throughout this whole thread.?

[Welpe]

I have LGP and then a sidestep the maintain. Charge.

[HawkeyeCubP]

This one looks easier to call than the MSU-UNC call that APG posted here. I'd go player control. Seems to me though, from the majority of games I watch at that level, that these close ones are usually called blocks. And to be fair, they're often pretty difficult without slowing them down.

[Raymond]

Without reading anyone else's responses. A1 travelled before starting his dribble. And then he committed a PC foul.

And not only did B1 get an initial LGP he also slid and got 2 feet down before A1 went airborne.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Without reading anyone else's responses. A1 travelled before starting his dribble. And then he committed a PC foul.

And not only did B1 get an initial LGP he also slid and got 2 feet down before A1 went airborne.

I wouldn't expect that travel to ever get called real-time.